Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2009

meathshooter

Sparks wrote: »

The gardai don't have the option to refuse the article 7, it's an entitlement of a license-holder under EU law.

I was refused an article 7 recently by my my super. got an amendment on existing cert, euro pass changed to new firearm and when I asked for article 7 I was told NO.I write him a letter outlining my reasons and he sent me back a letter stating that till the new proposed laws are cleared up he would not be issuing.Now I have gone and seeked Legal advise on this issue and the barrister said that the super has acted illegally so now were back to the old ways of policy lucky for me I have this in writing from the super who is generally aright and personally I think he was acting on orders from someone else

Our man in Havana

So how are we fixed now if we want to do a spot of shooting abroad?

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

In a bit more detail, the curious case of Article 38.

I presume you're referring to Section 38 and Section 17 rather than Articles of the constitution or EU directives

The first bit you seem to miss which is germane to rowa's post is this: "without prejudice to the provisions of the Firearms (Firearms Certificates for Non-Residents) Act 2000"

Secondly, SI 362 of 1993 which gave effect to EU Directive 91/477 is still in place and covers the use of the EFP and the Article 7 authority. Then there will also be a further SI to give effect to the amendments to 91/477.

Sparks

rrpc wrote: »

The first bit you seem to miss which is germane to rowa's post is this: "without prejudice to the provisions of the Firearms (Firearms Certificates for Non-Residents) Act 2000"
Secondly, SI 362 of 1993 which gave effect to EU Directive 91/477 is still in place and covers the use of the EFP and the Article 7 authority. Then there will also be a further SI to give effect to the amendments to 91/477.

Second-last paragraph:

Even the possession of a European Firearms Pass is of no benefit to the Irish shooter in this regard, as it makes provision only for Irish shooters travelling to other States, and no provision for the return journey; no such provision was necessary when Article 21 of the 1964 Act existed, as any Irish shooter with a European Firearms Pass had it by way of possessing an Irish Firearms Certificate and thus had automatic permission to return to the country with their firearm. Ironically, under the proposed new Article 17, a non-resident coming to Ireland to shoot would have no difficulties – both the new Article 17 and the European Firearms Pass SI make explicit provision permitting their entry to the State with their firearms. To most native Irish shooters, such a state of affairs would seem… unusually unbalanced.

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

Second-last paragraph: Even the possession of a European Firearms Pass is of no benefit to the Irish shooter in this regard, as it makes provision only for Irish shooters travelling to other States, and no provision for the return journey; no such provision was necessary when Article 21 of the 1964 Act existed, as any Irish shooter with a European Firearms Pass had it by way of possessing an Irish Firearms Certificate and thus had automatic permission to return to the country with their firearm. Ironically, under the proposed new Article 17, a non-resident coming to Ireland to shoot would have no difficulties – both the new Article 17 and the European Firearms Pass SI make explicit provision permitting their entry to the State with their firearms. To most native Irish shooters, such a state of affairs would seem… unusually unbalanced.

I wish you'd stop referring to Sections of the firearms acts as Articles, it's confusing, especially when you are also referring to Article 7's etc.

That paragraph is a bit of a jumble because it's referring to a piece of legislation which could not have anticipated the EU directive. Section 21 of the 1964 act predated the EFP and really bacame irrelevant when that directive bacame law in 1993.

Your Irish FAC is your authority to bring your own firearm back into the state. The Article 7 is required for you to purchase a firearm in another EU state.

There is also the matter of the true meaning of the word 'import'. This is the act of purchasing goods from a foreign country, not bringing goods back that you brought out with you; on holidays for example.

Sparks

rrpc wrote: »

I wish you'd stop referring to Sections of the firearms acts as Articles, it's confusing, especially when you are also referring to Article 7's etc.

Wish granted, s/Article/Section/g done. I'm officially blaming the late-night drafting

That paragraph is a bit of a jumble because it's referring to a piece of legislation which could not have anticipated the EU directive.

It didn't have to anticipate anything as it was necessary in and of itself. The EU SI was drafted with it in existance, however, so when you cut out Section 21 of 1964, you muck up the EU SI as well.

Section 21 of the 1964 act predated the EFP and really bacame irrelevant when that directive bacame law in 1993.

I disagree, because the Europass SI doesn't make any provision for returning to the State with your firearm; nor does it make any provision whatsoever for coming back to the State from outside the EU (eg. going to the World Cup in Ft.Benning or Changwon or Sydney).

Your Irish FAC is your authority to bring your own firearm back into the state.

This is only the case because of section 21 of 1964 from what I can see. I can find no other reference in the legislation which states that the Irish firearms certificate changes the nature of returning with a firearm from an import to something else. And I've been looking.

The Article 7 is required for you to purchase a firearm in another EU state.

Indeed, and it's not really germane to the importation question.

There is also the matter of the true meaning of the word 'import'. This is the act of purchasing goods from a foreign country, not bringing goods back that you brought out with you; on holidays for example.

That's a very solid, common-sense answer. But not a legal one; and it begs the question of why it was felt necessary in 1964 to introduce section 21 at all, if everyone just knew that coming home with a firearm you held a certificate for wasn't an import.

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

I disagree, because the Europass SI doesn't make any provision for returning to the State with your firearm; nor does it make any provision whatsoever for coming back to the State from outside the EU (eg. going to the World Cup in Ft.Benning or Changwon or Sydney).

But the europass law was never intended to be an import/export facility, it was intended to make travel within the EU with a firearm easier for citizens of the EU. The fact that it never achieved what it set out to do is irrelevant, what is relevant is that firearms law states that you can carry and possess your firearm anywhere in the state when you have a certificate to do so, which includes up to the border with another country. After that it's up to the country you are entering to deal with the legality of your possession etc.

This is only the case because of section 21 of 1964 from what I can see. I can find no other reference in the legislation which states that the Irish firearms certificate changes the nature of returning with a firearm from an import to something else. And I've been looking.

Section 21 of 1964 is actually only an amendment to section 17 of the 1925 act. Section 16 and 17 deal with the export and import of firearms and clearly were intended to deal with the true meaning of the words 'export' and 'import'. Section 21 doesn't specifically state that you're coming back with your firearm either, it merely allows you to 'import' a firearm for which you have a certificate.

That's a very solid, common-sense answer. But not a legal one; and it begs the question of why it was felt necessary in 1964 to introduce section 21 at all, if everyone just knew that coming home with a firearm you held a certificate for wasn't an import.

Because it was an offence under section 17 of the 1925 act to import without a licence from the Minister and rather than having loads of applications for import licences, it was obviously simpler to allow you import under your cert.

Sparks

rrpc wrote: »

Because it was an offence under section 17 of the 1925 act to import without a licence from the Minister and rather than having loads of applications for import licences, it was obviously simpler to allow you import under your cert.

Are we arguing the same thing here? That above point is precisely what I've been saying; and now that section 21 has been repealed, and the new section 17 makes no provision for importing under your cert, coming back into the country is once again an offence (under section 17(8)).

I know that wasn't the intent of the legislation, the DoJ has said so officially - but as I said at the time to them, the intent is not reflected by the legislation. Why that is the case isn't really at issue - the problem we're left with is that the letter of the law seems to say that coming back home from Bisley week this year with your rifle would be an offence unless you had a firearms dealer get an importation order for it.

I'm thinking a clean solution might be to not commence articles 36 and 38 the way they're written.

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

Are we arguing the same thing here? That above point is precisely what I've been saying; and now that section 21 has been repealed, and the new section 17 makes no provision for importing under your cert, coming back into the country is once again an offence (under section 17(8)).

No. I'm saying that importation and travelling with your firearm are two separate things. You believe that Section 21 relates to travelling with your firearm when in fact if you read it with Sections 16 and 17 it clearly relates to the purchase and subsequent importation of a firearm.

It might be instructuive to have a look at the UK firearms act and see is there an equivalent to section 21 there.

Sparks

rrpc wrote: »

No. I'm saying that importation and travelling with your firearm are two separate things.

But where is that defined in law, except in Section 21?

You believe that Section 21 relates to travelling with your firearm when in fact if you read it with Sections 16 and 17 it clearly relates to the purchase and subsequent importation of a firearm.

In fairness rrpc, if it clearly related to that, I wouldn't pose the question at all. In fact, if you read the original section 17 and the replacement section 17, it clearly does not differentiate between travelling with and importing a firearm.

daveob007

Basically i find the whole thing confusing, not stupid or anything just too many articles and paragraphs and subsections!!!!!!!!
is there any way of getting this thing in simple terms??? easy to understand.
Anyway the fact remains that Ahern got his way and we got shafted..
once it's signed off by the president it becomes law and there's nothing we can do to stop this dictatorship.
Do we live in a democracy or what,,,we rejected the lisbon treaty but bullied us into voting again.
They have punished us law abiding licence holders by killing our sport for the future.
What about labour and fine gael,have they done anything to help us apart from saying a few words in the dail.

JUST HAVING A RANT HERE very peeed off with the whole thing.

When does the president sign this new bill into law????

Grizzly 45

Was having a look thru Atheist Ireland[Another bunch of folks mightly teed off with Dermo...who isnt these days??]
Senator Iravnia Baicik[sic] raised an intresting point.These laws on blasphemy will be reviewed in five years to see wether they are working or not.

Question is;Will the CJMisc Act and all of the rest of these laws be reviewed in 2014 to see wether they are workable and bringing benefits heretofore unknown to the Irish people??
Anyone more enlightened legally can yea or nay this?

If this is the case that gives us five years to get our acts together as shooting bodies and come up with somthing more coherent than a me fein augus chuir an skean sa gach duine eille strategy.

rrpc

Sparks wrote: »

But where is that defined in law, except in Section 21?

Well it's not defined in Section 21 either. That section only referred to imports.

In fairness rrpc, if it clearly related to that, I wouldn't pose the question at all. In fact, if you read the original section 17 and the replacement section 17, it clearly does not differentiate between travelling with and importing a firearm.

Plainly because it shouldn't need to. The meaning of the word 'import' is clearly understood in law, otherwise we would be filling out forms in triplicate every time we took the car on holidays.

pajero2005

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Question is;Will the CJMisc Act and all of the rest of these laws be reviewed in 2014 to see wether they are workable and bringing benefits heretofore unknown to the Irish people??

Or what could happen is if it is reviewed in 2014 they could realise it has done no good whatsoever. And rather than holding their hands up and saying we were wrong, go even further down the road of a nanny state and remove center fires, while limiting rim fires and shot guns to land owners.:eek:

Anything is possibe with this bunch:rolleyes:. But all we can do is hope they wont be around by 2014......... Feck it, even 2010:D

LB6

COPY AND PASTE FROM RTE WEBSITE

"Speaking after the final vote was taken, Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern said it was important the Bill the people supported was passed before the Oireachtas took its holidays.

He said it did not represent a seismic shift in the criminal justice system and that while it may be needed now, the Oireachtas might decide it is no longer necessary in two or three years.

Even though the Bill was urgent, he said he rejected moving an early signature motion so that President Mary McAleese has sufficient time to consider its contents fully.

Minister Ahern said he hoped the Bill will be signed into law in the not too distant future."

Dvs

LB6 wrote: »

COPY AND PASTE FROM RTE WEBSITE

"Speaking after the final vote was taken, Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern said it was important the Bill the people supported was passed before the Oireachtas took its holidays.

He said it did not represent a seismic shift in the criminal justice system and that while it may be needed now, the Oireachtas might decide it is no longer necessary in two or three years.

Even though the Bill was urgent, he said he rejected moving an early signature motion so that President Mary McAleese has sufficient time to consider its contents fully.

Minister Ahern said he hoped the Bill will be signed into law in the not too distant future."

This statement is in relation to the Criminal justice amendment bill,
Not the criminal justice miscellaneous bill.

Dvs.

rrpc

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Question is;Will the CJMisc Act and all of the rest of these laws be reviewed in 2014 to see wether they are workable and bringing benefits heretofore unknown to the Irish people??
Anyone more enlightened legally can yea or nay this?

Much more regularly than that. Amendment to the bill suggested by Charlie Flanagan has now been included in the final bill.

31.—The Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following
section after section 3D (inserted by section 30):
“3E.—The Commissioner shall conduct an annual review of the operation of the Firearms Acts 1925 to 2009 and shall submit a report to the Minister specifying the number and classes of certificates and authorisations issued under the Acts. The Minister shall lay a copy of such report before each House of the Oireachtas.”.

So the Commissioner has to report to both houses annually on the operation of the firearms acts. This would give an opportunity to make submissions based on the hopefully more accurate statistics that would be included in this report.

The firearms acts are also due to be restated into one coherent whole and there's obviously an opportunity for the FCP and others to make submissions on that. Personally I feel that at least one third of the acts could go in the bin as being either useless, duplicated or outdated. There are literally pages of definitions which are repeated from act to act as each of them stood alone as well as together with the 1925 act.

Then there's also section 2(3) and 2(4) which are largely the same, but are separate because 2(3) came with the original act and 2(4) came in 1964 and yet they do the same things.

There are many many more such examples of duplication and the 2006 act merely added to them.

Terrier

Considering in 16 days the current licences are out of date they are cutting things pretty fine to be implementing a new licensing system

rrpc

Terrier wrote: »

Considering in 16 days the current licences are out of date they are cutting things pretty fine to be implementing a new licensing system

No, the just passed bill extends our licences to as far as July 2010 in order to stagger the renewal dates of all licences in the future.

If you get a new licence after this bill is passed, the renewal date will be the date three years on from when it was first issued.

Dusty87

My fo told me current licences are extended til november

rrpc

Well he's wrong.

(3) Pending the commencement of section 30 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006, the following provisions shall have effect for the purpose of continuing in force on a phased basis, for a maximum period of 12 months after the date of expiry of each certificate, all firearm certificates in force at the date of commencement of this subsection and that would otherwise expire on 31 July 2009 (“relevant firearm certificates”):

(a) The Commissioner shall establish a prescribed number of groups of relevant firearm certificates.

(b) Each group established shall be assigned a prescribed number of relevant firearm certificates selected randomly by the Commissioner in a prescribed manner.

(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), those certificates relating to firearms that would be deemed to be restricted firearms in accordance with section 29 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 shall be assigned to the first group established.

(d) The firearm certificates in the first group shall continue in force until a prescribed date or dates in a prescribed month after July 2009.

(e) The firearm certificates in each subsequent group shall continue in force until a prescribed date in each subsequent month after the firearm certificates in the first group expire, and not later than 31 July 2010, until all relevant firearm certificates have expired.

daveob007

Okso the bill is a done deal and we have to deal with the fallout from that.
How do we fair out in relation to rimfire pistols used in olympic sports?
is there a list of suitable pistols or diciplines available for us to go by and how do we prove to our supers that a new cert is for this olympic shooting??
Still many questions to be answered.

Sparks

rrpc wrote: »

Well he's wrong.

Not necessarily - July 2010 is the latest they can push it, but they could start this november easily enough.

freddieot

"My fo told me current licences are extended til november"


Who knows - maybe he's right but that would not make a lot of sense. The whole idea is to stagger subsequent renewal dates sto spread the workload so why make it November for them all instead of 1 August ? However, I suppose , what has sense got to do with any of this...

Our man in Havana

I assume some written matter will arrive soon?

rrpc

To paraphrase the section in the bill to make it more accessible

All licences will be divided up into a set number of groups. The first group will consist of restricted firearms.

Everyone will get a letter telling them when their licence(s) will expire and giving them up to three months to apply for their new three year licence.

Everyone will get a free extension to their current licence up to the new date of expiry. The maximum free extension will be up to 31st July 2010.

The first group could conceivably all fall due in November, as if you add three months to the end of July, you get the 1st November. On the other hand if you have three months to apply, you can also apply in the first month so really it'll be a bit more haphazard and random as some people will apply and others will wait as yet more 'groups' come on stream and are added to the pot.

That's the whole point of the exercise: that renewals will be staggered so as not to fall due all at the same time.

Obviously for some considerable time, they will all fall due in the same twelve month period.

daveob007

This thread is gone very quiet,suppose many people on hols or something.
Has this bill been signed into law yet or when is it due to be signed????

rowa

daveob007 wrote: »

This thread is gone very quiet,suppose many people on hols or something.
Has this bill been signed into law yet or when is it due to be signed????

i just think people are resigned to it now , its a done deal , pistol shooting is dead in the water and everyone is wondering whats next centrefire rifle perhaps ?

Sparks

Not seen it announced yet, but it's just a matter of time.

Jonty

Sparks wrote: »

Not seen it announced yet, but it's just a matter of time.

Before centrefire rifle is finished too?